FILE -This March 7, 2012 file photo shows Fane Lozman talking to a reporter in Miami Beach, Fla. The Supreme Court says a Florida man's floating home was a house, not a boat, and not covered under maritime law. The high court on Tuesday ruled 7-2 for Lozman, who argued that his gray, two-story vessel in the marina in Riviera Beach, Fla., should not have been affected by maritime law. (AP Photo/Alan Diaz, File)

The Supreme Court ruled Tuesday that a Florida man's floating home was a house, not a boat, and not covered under maritime law, in a case that could affect thousands of people around the country who make their home on floating structures in marinas, bays and coves.

The high court ruled 7-2 for Fane Lozman, who argued that the gray, two-story craft approximately 60 feet in length that he towed to the marina in Riviera Beach, Fla., should not have been affected by maritime law.

Justice Stephen Breyer said maritime law affects vessels that are "watercraft or other artificial contrivance used, or capable of being used, as a means of transportation on water." The key words, Breyer said, were "capable of being used" and the court was concerned with practical possibilities, not merely theoretical.

"We believe that a reasonable observer, looking to the home's physical characteristics and activities, would not consider it to be designed to any practical degree for carrying people or things on water," Breyer said. "And we consequently conclude that the floating home is not a vessel."

In 2006, Lozman towed his 60-by-12 floating home to a marina in Riviera Beach, where he kept it docked. After several unsuccessful attempts to evict him, city officials used U.S. maritime law to impose a lien on Lozman's property.

Lozman argued that it was a house, which would have given it some protection from seizure under state law. But federal judges sided with the city, and the property was destroyed.

More than 5,000 Americans own floating homes, and there are more than 60 floating casinos in the United States.